Literature DB >> 24269636

Cam impingement: defining the presence of a cam deformity by the alpha angle: data from the CHECK cohort and Chingford cohort.

R Agricola1, J H Waarsing2, G E Thomas3, A J Carr4, M Reijman5, S M A Bierma-Zeinstra6, S Glyn-Jones7, H Weinans8, N K Arden9.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Cam impingement is characterized by abnormal contact between the proximal femur and acetabulum caused by a non-spherical femoral head, known as a cam deformity. A cam deformity is usually quantified by the alpha angle; greater alpha angles substantially increase the risk for osteoarthritis (OA). However, there is no consensus on which alpha angle threshold to use to define the presence of a cam deformity. AIM: To determine alpha angle thresholds that define the presence of a cam deformity and a pathological cam deformity based on development of OA.
METHODS: Data from both the prospective CHECK cohort of 1002 individuals (45-65 years) and the prospective population-based Chingford cohort of 1003 women (45-64 years) with respective follow-up times of 5 and 19 years were combined. The alpha angle was measured at baseline on anteroposterior radiographs, from which a threshold for the presence of a cam deformity was determined based on its distribution. Further, a pathological alpha angle threshold was determined based on the highest discriminative ability for development of end-stage OA at follow-up.
RESULTS: A definite bimodal distribution of the alpha angle was found in both cohorts with a normal distribution up to 60°, indicating a clear distinction between normal and abnormal alpha angles. A pathological threshold of 78° resulted in the maximum area under the ROC curve.
CONCLUSION: Epidemiological data of two large cohorts shows a bimodal distribution of the alpha angle. Alpha angle thresholds of 60° to define the presence of a cam deformity and 78° for a pathological cam deformity are proposed.
Copyright © 2013 Osteoarthritis Research Society International. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Alpha angle; Cam deformity; Cam impingement; Definition; Femoroacetabular impingement; Hip OA

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24269636     DOI: 10.1016/j.joca.2013.11.007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Osteoarthritis Cartilage        ISSN: 1063-4584            Impact factor:   6.576


  45 in total

Review 1.  New perspectives on femoroacetabular impingement syndrome.

Authors:  Moin Khan; Asheesh Bedi; Freddie Fu; Jon Karlsson; Olufemi R Ayeni; Mohit Bhandari
Journal:  Nat Rev Rheumatol       Date:  2016-03-10       Impact factor: 20.543

2.  Hip shape is symmetric, non-dependent on limb dominance and gender-specific: implications for femoroacetabular impingement. A 3D CT analysis in asymptomatic subjects.

Authors:  Vasco V Mascarenhas; Paulo Rego; Pedro Dantas; Miguel Castro; Lennart Jans; Rui M Marques; Nélia Gouveia; Francisco Soldado; Olufemi R Ayeni; José G Consciência
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2017-11-06       Impact factor: 5.315

3.  What Is the Prevalence of Cam Deformity After Prophylactic Pinning of the Contralateral Asymptomatic Hip in Unilateral Slipped Capital Femoral Epiphysis? A 10-year Minimum Followup Study.

Authors:  Till D Lerch; Eduardo N Novais; Florian Schmaranzer; Kai Ziebarth; Simon D Steppacher; Moritz Tannast; Klaus A Siebenrock
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2019-05       Impact factor: 4.176

4.  The scientific foundations and associated injury risks of early soccer specialisation.

Authors:  Paul J Read; Jon L Oliver; Mark B A De Ste Croix; Gregory D Myer; Rhodri S Lloyd
Journal:  J Sports Sci       Date:  2016-04-27       Impact factor: 3.337

5.  Planar dGEMRIC Maps May Aid Imaging Assessment of Cartilage Damage in Femoroacetabular Impingement.

Authors:  Evgeny Bulat; Sarah D Bixby; Carl Siversson; Leslie A Kalish; Simon K Warfield; Young-Jo Kim
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  Is early treatment of cam-type femoroacetabular impingement the key to avoiding associated full thickness isolated chondral defects?

Authors:  Tim Claßen; Konrad Körsmeier; Michael Kamminga; Sascha Beck; Jan Rekowski; Marcus Jäger; Stefan Landgraeber
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2014-10-04       Impact factor: 4.342

7.  Differences in the association of hip cartilage lesions and cam-type femoroacetabular impingement with movement patterns: a preliminary study.

Authors:  Deepak Kumar; Alexander Dillon; Lorenzo Nardo; Thomas M Link; Sharmila Majumdar; Richard B Souza
Journal:  PM R       Date:  2014-02-14       Impact factor: 2.298

8.  Characteristics associated with joint replacement in early symptomatic knee or hip osteoarthritis: 6-year results from a nationwide prospective cohort study (CHECK).

Authors:  Alex N Bastick; Jurgen Damen; Rintje Agricola; Reinoud W Brouwer; Patrick Je Bindels; Sita Ma Bierma-Zeinstra
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2017-07-31       Impact factor: 5.386

9.  Population-based prevalence of multiple radiographically-defined hip morphologies: the Johnston County Osteoarthritis Project.

Authors:  R Raveendran; J L Stiller; C Alvarez; J B Renner; T A Schwartz; N K Arden; J M Jordan; A E Nelson
Journal:  Osteoarthritis Cartilage       Date:  2017-10-09       Impact factor: 6.576

10.  Measures of hip morphology are related to development of worsening radiographic hip osteoarthritis over 6 to 13 year follow-up: the Johnston County Osteoarthritis Project.

Authors:  A E Nelson; J L Stiller; X A Shi; K M Leyland; J B Renner; T A Schwartz; N K Arden; J M Jordan
Journal:  Osteoarthritis Cartilage       Date:  2015-10-20       Impact factor: 6.576

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.